Comments on: Good News, Bad News at GooTube

By: YouTube Revenues: $15 million per year, or per month?

YouTube Revenues: $15 million per year, or per month? — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 21:28:05 +0000

[...] still digesting the San Francisco Chronicle “the sky is falling” story and the recent good news/bad news coming out of GooTube. But it’s just too early to tell if Google stole YouTube away from its [...]

By: Steven

Steven — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 07:42:41 +0000

The site is really slow right now, especially with the player constantly trying to load itself.http://www.hotdvdtools.com

By: dysonlu

dysonlu — Tue, 06 Mar 2007 06:10:37 +0000

I feel that it’s the beginning of the end for Youtube. The days of “free-for-all” posting of copyrighted content are over and this spells doom for Youtube. I’ve experienced it first-hand: I used to be subscribed to several youtube users who used to post clips and highlights of tennis matches. These guys have a relatively large and loyal following from the tennis fans community. Several weeks ago, I went to youtube and realized their accounts were suspended. As a result, I will visit youtube far less frequently from now on and I’m sure there are and will be thousands and thousands of people who will start doing the same.

Youtube’s rise to fame is almost solely due to copyrighted materials — they are the main attractions. Speaking from personal experience, the great majority of youtube videos that my friends, co-workers and family members sent me were copyrighted stuff. Good and original “copyfree” contents are few and far in between — surely not enough to attract and retain millions of websurfers.

The Youtube acquisition will probably turn out to be a low ROI move by Google. But hey, this fat cat still has plenty of dough in the bank; certaintly enough for the employees to keep working in Wonderland of Luxury and Excess… for now.

By: mockriot » Is YouTube jumping the shark?

mockriot » Is YouTube jumping the shark? — Mon, 05 Mar 2007 21:19:31 +0000

[...] of YouTube’s biggest competitor in the video sharing space, MySpace, has done a lot what Mike Arrington calls “behind-the-scenes trashing” prompting some to wonder if their $900 million advertising [...]

By: Libor

Libor — Mon, 05 Mar 2007 15:28:23 +0000

Agree with John (25), Billy (33), Toszcze (34).
You Tube was sharing and still is, Broadcast / Joost, etc. is just publishing the traditional way, via Internet. The internet allows the media giants more channels, but there is still a publishing company / editor control behind, financed by ads, with conflict of interests, etc.

Aquiring YouTube, Google made it unattractive for the Studios, networks, etc. Why should 10 rabbits attack one snake ? The owner of Google and YouTube probably knew this.

Now since the snake (YouTube) now has to listen to the snake-charmer (google), it is taken out of the market / competition for media and advertising content almost completely.

But we can still upload our videos, as Chad / 31 explains the key business model of YouTube, therefore – as soon as quality of privately produced (HD-)videos and network bandwidth improve, why should that not remain to stay a market, even without a hype and with less ads.

Well, the hype is pretty dead, YouTube still there and even without the help of CBS, Viacom, Fox, RTL, etc. The question is not, whether to watch online, or offline TV, the question is: Do you want controlled half true company owned content or diverse half true private content – but in the this case the clicks and ratings tell you, whether its funny or true or not !

By: Sherwood

Sherwood — Mon, 05 Mar 2007 15:27:06 +0000

I think CBS had a good experience with YouTube because they got attention from an audience that typically would ignore offerings from “The Tiffany Network.” But for MTV etc. the online video audience *is* their core audience – so of course the lack of YouTube clips sent these people flocking to the official sites.

By: BS Meter

BS Meter — Sun, 04 Mar 2007 07:32:57 +0000

Viacom is blowing smoke. Alexa traffic shows that their rank is going down not up.

By: Video Squad

Video Squad — Sun, 04 Mar 2007 06:04:33 +0000

Youtube will be gone as we knew it before long. All the big media groups and new startups will slug it out as online tv, movies, and video establish dominance and popularity.

It will be fun to watch…..

By: Alex

Alex — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 21:01:33 +0000

Billy: Exactly. As to my point above.

By: Toszcze

Toszcze — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 19:56:04 +0000

I agree with John. Providing commercial content on YouTube will be the most useless thing they can do. People don’t care about “serious” content – they want funny content (that’s not good, but that’s true).

By: Billy

Billy — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 19:50:53 +0000

“Once one networks breaks from the pack and starts to provide full length programs on YouTube in exchange for a share of advertising revenue, I expect the rest to fall in short order.”

I think this is exactly backwards. If one network does align itself with YouTube, the other networks will run like people avoiding the plague. The majors will never allow all their content to be aggregated by one provider who will then control them all. They each want to be the dominant media company and will not allow their content to be trivialized as “just another video on YouTube”.

By: Dave

Dave — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 15:31:00 +0000

Bring back the old, independent You Tube. Yes it was raw and stupid at times, but it was not corporate!!!!

By: Swedish insider IT news

Swedish insider IT news — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 10:34:12 +0000

Fold together. Wrap it up. Forget.

By: Stan Miller

Stan Miller — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 06:37:01 +0000

media companies hold the leverage here. youtube is set to become the next napster-like footnote in history. this space is just waiting for an ‘apple’ to strike a deal to meet market demand.

By: scottfree

scottfree — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 05:06:56 +0000

Heres to seeing that YouTube is the albatross around Googles neck that brings this overhyped advertising company back to earth.

By: Alex

Alex — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 04:38:51 +0000

The simple matter of fact is that GooTube is such an ugly platform to distribute your content on. It looks far too amateur. Why would I want my million dollar BBC doco right next to a video of a girl talking to her webcam. I want to distribute my content on par with what is equally of high quality.

Yes GooTube has revolutionised the way we watch media but no I don’t think they are the answer for taking us to the next step.

I much prefer Joost.

GooTube just seems too evil for me

By: Webomatica

Webomatica — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 03:30:26 +0000

The Google YouTube Ka-Billion Dollar Question: Are “You” Not Enough?…

In recent weeks, Google has been scurrying like mad trying to get all the big, old entertainment copyright holders to sign YouTube content distribution deals, and allow all this currently, copyright infringing content to remain on the insanely popular …

By: Dave G

Dave G — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 01:02:59 +0000

@ 19

“It’s ludicris to think that we’ll be visiting each of the content provider’s website to view their videos.”

I think that is exactly what the big broadcasters said about cable…no one will visit more than 3 channels. It is just silly. If you really want to watch a certain video…and it is only available at blah.com – you will go to blah.com. It is just as easy, if not easier, to click a ff bookmark as it is to navigate to a youtube channel.

@ 22

I agree…once google bought youtube…it just lost something. It went from cool to normal. And normal is boring.

By: John

John — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 00:58:02 +0000

Who cares about content deals! People go to youtube to see Offbeat videos and not cbs or nbc show!

http://www.comonetwork.com

By: Ron Diggity

Ron Diggity — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 00:51:46 +0000

I don’t remember the last time I visited youtube since Google purchased it. I’ve found other online video sites that work just the same. If the network companies can create a similar youtube with their content that people like to watch, well then Google will get its first big hit.

Youtube…really is gootube cause they’re in a sticky situation, and I smell something better coming from the media companies.

By: Alaskan Carnivor

Alaskan Carnivor — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 00:32:00 +0000

correction Fox TV is available @ http://myspace.com/fox , not the root url…

By: Alaskan Carnivor

Alaskan Carnivor — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 00:31:03 +0000

Hey y’all. Speaking of Fox and television shows, some bad news for Windows users.. http://myspace.com simply will not work on Vista. I’ve seen it with me own eyes.. It goes to the normal screen for about two seconds and then you get this error message. “FOX Video on Demand does not currently support computers running Windows Vista operating system. The site will support Windows Vista in the near future.” grrr.. Interesting thing. The url for the error (dns pointer) is here http://creative...port/vista.html Wahhh.. I want my 24….

By: JMccain

JMccain — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 23:54:25 +0000

Youtube will just be another waterhole – “I came, I saw and I go”….

pretty soon there will tons of these niche “youtubes” from the content providers and host their own clips. How’s GooTube going to compete then?

The $1b spend on youtube would be better spend had they got Myspace.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 23:39:59 +0000

Viacom is simply short sighted. Eventually the web will be similar to television – one medium with a bunch of channels. It’s ludicris to think that we’ll be visiting each of the content provider’s website to view their videos.

The only difference is that the public at large can also create their own channels. I’m not saying YouTube is perfect, but I can’t wait to see Verizon et al come crawling back if YouTube is successful. If Joost wins, well I’ll eat my words

By: lonelybloggers

lonelybloggers — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 23:36:11 +0000

I think there are going to be alot of winners and losers here. Wonder if Google is re-thinking their purchase of YouTube? When does Microsoft plan to step up their efforts? This battle may take years before any sense is made of it ..